|
On a different note, I think I kinda hated Cloud Atlas, but my bf loved it. He thought it was romantic, but I hear the filmmakers added in those elements of love surviving through eons of time. I found it cheesy and trite, though I was entertained enough.
The theme of reincarnation did not have to be hammered home by having the same gang of actors appear in different roles in each of the six stories. They were shoehorned in, and some of the accents and especially the make-up was just cringe-worthy.
Some of the stories were interesting, too many were not. It's a pretty film to look at, and the mix of genre's is interesting. But I really hate it when a novel told in a certain way is made suitable (i.e., dumbed-down) for cinema by constant cross-cutting.
As I understand it, the novel tackles it Story A, B, C, D, E and F - each to a certain point, and then wraps them up F, E, D, C, B and A. To me, that's a much more interesting structure, and I contest the assumption it can't work on film and instead all six stories must be constantly intercut. That's hack work. Quite literally. Sure, it prevents boredom. It also prevents getting more than mildly interested in any of the stories.
As I also understand it, there is only one character reincarnated from story to story in the novel. The casting suggestion that everyone is reincarnated was silly, imo, and it was actually distracting trying to figure out who was playing who in each story under tons of make-up.
I'm going to read the book. Bah on the movie.
|